Draft Theses on the Role and Functions ofThe Trade Unions Under the New Economic Policy[2]

Written:Written December 30, 1921—January 4, 1922Published:Published with amendments January 17, 1922 inPravdaNo. 12.

      Printed from the manuscript.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,1971,

      Moscow,Volume 42,

      pages374b-386a.Translated:Bernard IsaacsTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaandD. WaltersPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive

      (2004).You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

ThePlenum of the C.C., R.C.P. on 28.XII.1921 considered the question
of the role and functions of the trade unions under the New Economic
Policy. The plenum heard the reports of Comrades Rudzutak, Andreyev and
Shlyapnikov (the planned report by Comrade Lutovinov was not made owing to
failure to call the reporter out in time). After an exchange of opinions it
was decided to submit the original draft theses of Comrades Rudzutak and
Andreyev to a committee of these two comrades with the addition of Lenin
and to charge this committee with drafting theses for endorsement by the
Politbureau.

(Severallines will be added to thisafterapproval of the
draft by the committee and then the Politbureau.)

TheNew Economic Policy introduces a number of important changes in the
position of the proletariat and, consequently, in that of the trade
unions. These changes are due to the fact that in their entire policy of
transition from capitalism to socialism the Communist Party and the Soviet
government are now adopting special methods to implement this transition
and in many respects are operating differently from the way they operated
before: they are capturing a number of positions by a “new flanking
movement”, so to speak; they are drawing back in order to make better
preparations for a new offensive against capitalism. In particular, a free
market and capitalism, both subject to state control, are now being
permitted and are developing; on the other hand, the state enterprises are
being put on what is called a profit basis, i.e., they are in effect being
largely reorganised on commercial and capitalist lines.

Theproletarian state may, without changing its own nature,
permit freedom of trade and the development of capitalism only within
certain bounds, and only on the condition that the state regulates
(supervises, controls, determines the forms and methods of, etc.) private
trade and private capitalism. The success of such regulation will depend
not only on the state authorities, but also, and to a larger extent, on the
degree of maturity of the proletariat and of the masses of the working
people generally, on their cultural level, etc. But even if this regulation
is completely successful, the antagonism of class interests between labour
and capital will certainly remain. Consequently, one of the main tasks that
will henceforth confront the trade unions is to protect in every way the
class interests of the proletariat in its struggle against capital. This
task should be openly put in the forefront, and the machineryof the trade unions must be reorganised, modified or supplemented accordingly;
strike funds, and so on should be formed, or rather, built up.

Theconversion of state enterprises to what is called the profit basis is
inevitably and inseparably connected with the New Economic Policy; in the near
future this is bound to become the predominant, if not the sole, form of state
enterprise. Actually, this means that with the free market now permitted and
developing, the state enterprises, will to a large extent be put on a
commercial, capitalist basis. This circumstance, in view of the urgent need to
increase the productivity of labour and make every state enterprise pay its way
and show a profit, and in view of the inevitable rise of narrow departmental
interests and excessive departmental zeal, is bound to create a certain
conflict of interests between the masses of workers and the directors and
managers of the state enterprises, or the government departments in charge of
them. Therefore, it is undoubtedly the duty of the trade unions, in regard to
the state enterprises as well, to protect the class interests of the proletariat
and the working masses against their employers.

Aslong as classes exist, the class struggle is inevitable. In the
period of transition from capitalism to socialism the existence of classes
is inevitable; and the Programme of theRussian Communist Party definitely states that we are taking only the first
steps in the transition from capitalism to socialism. Hence, the Communist
Party, the Soviet government and the trade unions must frankly admit the
existence of a class struggle and its inevitability until the electrification of
industry and agriculture is completed— at least in the main—and
until small production and the supremacy of the market are thereby cut off at
the roots. It follows from this that at the present moment we can under no
circumstances abandon the idea of the strike struggle, we cannot, as a matter of
principle, conceive the possibility of a law that makes compulsory state
mediation take the place of strikes.

Onthe other hand, it is obvious that under capitalism the ultimate object of
the strike struggle is to break up the state machine and to overthrow the given
class state power. Under the transitional type of proletarian state such as
ours, however, the ultimate object of the strike struggle can only be to fortify
the proletarian state and the state power of the proletarian class by combating
the bureaucratic distortions, mistakes and flaws in this state, and by curbing
the class appetites of the capitalists who try to evade its control, etc. Hence,
the Communist Party, the Soviet government and the trade unions must never
forget and must never conceal from the workers and the mass of the working
people that the strike struggle in a state where the proletariat holds
political power can be explained and justified only by the bureaucratic
distortions of the proletarian state and by all sorts of survivals of the old
capitalist system in the government offices on the one hand, and by the
political immaturity and cultural backwardness of the mass of the working people
on the other. When the law courts and all other organs of the state are built on
a class basis, by the working people themselves, with the bourgeoisie excluded
from the electorate, the normal method of settling conflicts between labour and
capital, between employed and employers, will more and more often find
expression in the working people turning directly to the state authorities.

Thecompulsory wholesale signing up of all workers for membership in
the trade unions is no longer consistent with the present degree of
socialisation achieved in industry or with the level of development of the
masses. Compulsory membership has moreover introduced a certain degree of
bureaucratic distortion into the trade unions themselves. It is absolutely
essential to revert for a fairly considerable length of time to the
practice of voluntary membership in the trade unions. Under no
circumstances must trade union members be required to subscribe to any
specific political views; in this respect, as well as in respect of
religion, the trade unions must be non-partisan. All that must be required
of trade union members in the proletarian state is that they should
understand comradely discipline and the necessity of uniting the workers’
forces for the purpose of protecting the interests of the working people,
and that they should keep faith with the working people’s government, i.e.,
the Soviet government. The proletarian state must encourage the workers to
organise in trade unions both for legal and material reasons; but the trade
unions can have no rights without duties.

Followingits seizure of political power, the principal and fundamental
interest of the proletariat lies in securing an increase in output, an
enormous increase in the productive forces of society. This task, which is
clearly formulated in the Programme of the Russian Communist Party, is
particularly urgent in our country today owing to post-war ruin, famine and
economic dislocation. Hence, the speediest and most enduring success in
restoring large-scale industry is a condition without which no success can
be achieved in the general cause of emancipating labour from the yoke of
capital and securing the victory of socialism. To achievethis success in Russia, in the conditions at present obtaining in that
country, it is absolutely essential that all authority in the factories be
concentrated in the hands of the management. The factory management,
usually built up on the principle of one-man responsibility, must have
authority independently to fix and pay out wages, and also distribute
rations, working clothes, and all other supplies; it must enjoy the utmost
freedom to manoeuvre, exercise strict control of the actual successes
achieved in increasing production, in making the factory pay its way and
show a profit, and carefully select the most talented and capable
administrative personnel, etc.

Underthese circumstances, any direct interference by the trade unions
in the management of the factories must be regarded as positively harmful
and impermissible.

Itwould be absolutely wrong, however, to interpret this
indisputable axiom to mean that the trade unions must play no part in the
socialist organisation of industry and in the management of state
industry. Their participation in this is necessary in the following
strictly defined forms.

Theproletariat is the class foundation of the state making the
transition from capitalism to socialism. In a country where the small
peasantry is overwhelmingly predominant the proletariat can successfully
fulfil this function if it very skilfully, cautiously and gradually
establishes an alliance with the vast majority of the peasantry. The trade
unions must collaborate closely and constantly with the government, all the
political and economic activities of which are guided by the
class-conscious vanguard of the working class—the Communist Party. Being
a school of communism in general, the trade unions must, in particular, be
a school for training the whole mass of workers, and eventually all working
people, in the art of managing socialist industry (and gradually also
agriculture).

Proceedingfrom these principles, the trade unions’ part in the
activities connected with the business and administrative organisations of
the proletarian state should take the following main forms:

(1)Thetrade unions should help staff all the business and
   administrative bodies connected with economics by nominating their
   candidates for them and casting a consultative vote; the trade
   unions take part in these bodies too, not directly, but through the
   members of the higher state bodies, the members of business boards, members
   of the factory managements (where collegiate management is practised),
   managers, their assistants, etc., nominated by them and endorsed by the
   Communist Party and the Soviet government.(2)Oneof the most important functions of the trade unions is to
   promote and train factory managers from among the workers and the masses of
   the working people generally. At the present time we have scores of such
   factory managers who are quite satisfactory, and hundreds who are more or
   less satisfactory, but very soon, however, we must have hundreds of the
   former and thousands of the latter. The trade unions must much more
   carefully and persistently than hitherto keep a systematic register of all
   workers and peasants capable of holding posts of this kind, and thoroughly,
   efficiently and from every aspect verify the progress they make in learning
   the art of management.(3)Noless important is the participation of the trade unions in all
   the planning bodies of the proletarian state. In addition to participating
   in all cultural and educational activities and in production propaganda,
   the trade unions must also, on an increasing scale, enlist the working
   class and the masses of the working people generally for all branches of
   the work of building up the state economy; they must make them familiar
   with all aspects of economic life and with all details of industrial
   operations—from the procurement of raw materials to the marketing of the
   product; give them a more and more concrete understanding of the single
   state plan of socialist economy and the worker’s and peasant’s practical
   interest in its implementation.(4)Thedrawing up of wage rates and scales of supplies, etc., is one
   of the essential functions of the trade unions in the building of socialism
   and in their participation in the management of industry. In particular,
   disciplinary courts should steadily improve labour discipline and proper
   ways of promoting it and achieving increased productivity; but they must
   not interfere with the functions of the People’s Courts in general or with
   the functions of factory managements.

(1)Thetrade unions should help staff all the business and
   administrative bodies connected with economics by nominating their
   candidates for them and casting a consultative vote; the trade
   unions take part in these bodies too, not directly, but through the
   members of the higher state bodies, the members of business boards, members
   of the factory managements (where collegiate management is practised),
   managers, their assistants, etc., nominated by them and endorsed by the
   Communist Party and the Soviet government.

(2)Oneof the most important functions of the trade unions is to
   promote and train factory managers from among the workers and the masses of
   the working people generally. At the present time we have scores of such
   factory managers who are quite satisfactory, and hundreds who are more or
   less satisfactory, but very soon, however, we must have hundreds of the
   former and thousands of the latter. The trade unions must much more
   carefully and persistently than hitherto keep a systematic register of all
   workers and peasants capable of holding posts of this kind, and thoroughly,
   efficiently and from every aspect verify the progress they make in learning
   the art of management.

(3)Noless important is the participation of the trade unions in all
   the planning bodies of the proletarian state. In addition to participating
   in all cultural and educational activities and in production propaganda,
   the trade unions must also, on an increasing scale, enlist the working
   class and the masses of the working people generally for all branches of
   the work of building up the state economy; they must make them familiar
   with all aspects of economic life and with all details of industrial
   operations—from the procurement of raw materials to the marketing of the
   product; give them a more and more concrete understanding of the single
   state plan of socialist economy and the worker’s and peasant’s practical
   interest in its implementation.

(4)Thedrawing up of wage rates and scales of supplies, etc., is one
   of the essential functions of the trade unions in the building of socialism
   and in their participation in the management of industry. In particular,
   disciplinary courts should steadily improve labour discipline and proper
   ways of promoting it and achieving increased productivity; but they must
   not interfere with the functions of the People’s Courts in general or with
   the functions of factory managements.

Thislist of the major functions of the trade unions in the work of building up
socialist economy, should, of course, be drawn up in greater detail by the
competent trade union and government bodies. The most important thing is that
the trade unions should consciously and resolutely avoid direct, inexpert,
incompetent and irresponsible interference in administrative matters, which has
caused no little harm, and should start persistent, practical activities
calculated to extend over a long period of years and designed to give the
workers and all the working people generallypractical trainingin the
art ofmanagingthe economy of the whole country.

Contactwith the masses, i.e., with the overwhelming majority of the workers
(and eventually of all the working people), is the most important and most
fundamental condition for the success of all trade union activity. In all the
trade union organisations and their machinery, from bottom up, there should be
instituted, and tested in practice over a period of many years, a system of
responsible comrades—who must not all be Communists—who should
live right among the workers, study their lives in every detail, and be able
unerringly, on any question, and at any time, to judge the mood, the real needs,
aspirations, and thoughts of the masses. They must be able without a shadow of
false idealisation to define the degree of their class-consciousness and the
extent to which they are influenced by various prejudices and survivals of the
past; and they must be ableto win the boundless confidence of the, masses by a comradely attitude and
concern for their needs. One of the greatest and most serious dangers that
confront the numerically small Communist Party, which, as the vanguard of
the working class, is guiding a vast country in the process of transition
to socialism (for the time being without the direct support of the more
advanced countries), is isolation from the masses, the danger that the
vanguard may run too far ahead and fail to “straighten out the line”,
fail to maintain firm contact with the whole army of labour, i.e., with the
overwhelming majority of workers and peas ants. Just as the very best
factory, with the very best motors and first-class machines, will be forced
to remain idle if the transmission belts from the motors to the machines
are damaged, so our work of socialist construction must meet with
inevitable disaster if the trade unions—the transmission belts from the
Communist Party to the masses—are badly fitted or function badly. It is
not sufficient to explain, to reiterate and corroborate this truth; it must
be backed up organisationally by the whole structure of the trade unions
and by their everyday activities.

Fromall the foregoing it is evident that there are a number of contradictions
in the various functions of the trade unions. On the one hand, their principal
method of operation is that of persuasion and education; on the other hand, as
participants in the exercise of state power they cannot refuse to share in
coercion. On the one hand, their main function is to protect the interests of
the masses of the working people in the most direct and immediate sense of the
term; on the other hand, as participants in the exercise of state power and
builders of the economy as a whole they cannot refuse to resort to pressure. On
the one hand, they must operate in military fashion, for the dictatorship of the
proletariat is the fiercest, most dogged and most desperate class war; on the
other hand, specifically military methods of operationare least of all applicable to the trade unions. On the one hand, they must be
able to adapt themselves to the masses, to their level; on the other hand, they
must never pander to the prejudices and backwardness of the masses, but steadily
raise them to a higher and higher level, etc., etc.

Thesecontradictions are no accident, and they will persist for several
decades. For one thing, these contradictions are inherent in every school. And
the trade unions are a school of communism. We cannot count, until the lapse of
several decades, on the majority of the workers achieving the highest level of
development and discarding all traces and memories of the “school”
for adults. Secondly, as long as survivals of capitalism and small production
remain, contradictions between them and the young shoots of socialism are
inevitable throughout the social system.

Twopractical conclusions must be drawn from this. First, for the successful
conduct of trade union activities it is not enough to understand their functions
correctly, it is not enough to organise them properly. In addition, special tact
is required, ability to approach the masses in a special way in each individual
case for the purpose of raising these masses to a higher cultural, economic and
political stage with the minimum of friction.

Second,the aforementioned contradictions will inevitably give rise to disputes,
disagreements, friction, etc. A higher body is required with sufficient
authority to settle these at once. This higher body is the Communist Party and
the international federation of the Communist Parties of all countries—the
Communist International.

Themain principles on this question are set forth in the Programme of the
Russian Communist Party; but these will remain paper principles unless constant
attention is paid to the facts which indicate the degree to which they are put
into practice. Recent facts of this kind are: first, cases of the murder of
engineers by workers in socialised mines not only in the Urals, but also in the
Donets Basin;second, the suicide of V. V. Oldenborger, chief engineer of the Moscow

			     Waterworks.[1]

TheCommunist Party and the Soviet government as a whole bear a far
greater share of the blame for cases of this kind than the trade unions. It
is not a question now of establishing the degree of political guilt, but of
drawing certain political conclusions. Unless our leading bodies, i.e., the
Communist Party, the Soviet government and the trade unions, guard as the
apple of their eye every specialist who does his work conscientiously and
knows and loves it—even though the ideas of communism are totally alien
to him—it will be useless to expect any serious progress in socialist
construction. We may not be able to achieve it soon, but we must at all
costs achieve a situation in which specialists—as a separate social
stratum, which will persist until we have reached the highest stage of
development of communist society—can enjoy better conditions of life
under socialism than they enjoyed under capitalism insofar as concerns
their material and legal status, comradely collaboration with the workers
and peasants, and in the intellectual plane, i.e., finding satisfaction in
their work, realising that it is socially useful and independent of the
sordid interests of the capitalist class. Nobody will regard a government
department as being tolerably well organised if it does not take systematic
measures to provide for all the needs of the specialists, to reward the
best of them, to safeguard and protect their interests, etc., and does not
secure practical results in this. The trade unions must conduct all the
activities of the type indicated (or systematically collaborate in the
activities of all the government departments concerned) not from the point
of view of the interests of the given department, but from the point of
view of the interests of labour and of the economy as a whole. With regard
to the specialists, on the trade unions devolves the very arduous duty of
daily exercising influence on the broad masses of the working people in
order to create proper relations between them and the specialists. Only
such activities can produce really important practical results.

Tradeunions are really effective only when they unite very broad
strata of the non-Party workers. This must give rise—particularly in a
country in which the peasantry largely predominates—to relative
stability, specifically among the trade unions, of those political
influences that serve as the superstructure over the remnants of capitalism
and over small production. These influences are petty-bourgeois, i.e.,
Socialist-Revolutionary and Menshevik (the Russian variety of the parties
of the II and II 1/2 Internationals) on the one hand, and anarchist on the
other. Only among these trends has any considerable number of people
remained who defend capitalism ideologically and not from selfish class
motives, and continue to believe in the non-class nature of the
“democracy”, “equality” and “liberty” in general that they preach.

Itis to this socio-economic cause and not to the role of individual
groups, still less of individual persons, that we must attribute the
survivals (sometimes even the revival) in our country of such
petty-bourgeois ideas among the trade unions. The Communist Party, the
Soviet bodies that conduct cultural and educational activities and all
Communist members of trade unions must therefore devote far more attention
to the ideological struggle against petty-bourgeois influences, trends and
deviations among the trade unions, especially because the New Economic
Policy is bound to lead to a certain strengthening of capitalism. It is
urgently necessary to counteract this by intensifying the struggle against
petty-bourgeois influences upon the working class.

Discusstogether with the theses.

Givethis to Comrade Molotovwithout rewriting.

Thisis the end of the publishable theses, i.e., the draft of them that
is being submitted to the commission and then the Politbureau.

Isuggest that the resolution contained in Comrade Rudzutak’s draft be
adopted by a special decision of the Politbureau in the following wording:

Not for publicationThe Politbureau directs the Orgbureau to set up under the Orgbureau of the
Central Committee a special commission to check and replace some of the
leading officials (and if possible all communist functionaries) in the
trade union movement for the purpose of intensifying the struggle against
petty-bourgeois, S.R., Menshevik and anarchist influences and
deviations. This commission to complete its work (or most of it) by the
next, Eleventh, congress of the R.C.P. and submit its report to the

Party congress.[3]

[1]Hereis the report about this inPravdafor 3.I. 1922: ((quote
the full text on p. 4)).[4]—Lenin

[2]Leninstarted writing theDraft Theses on the Role and Functions of
the Trade Unions Under the New Economic Policysoon after the plenum
of the C.C., R.C.P.(B.) on December 28, 1921. The draft theses were
discussed by members of the commission (A. A. Andreyev and Y. E. Rudzutak)
and members of the Politbureau; in the course of the discussion amendments
and addenda were introduced. On January 12, 1922, the draft was discussed
at a meeting of the Politbureau, which resolved that “the text of the
theses proposed by Lenin be adopted as a basis.... The theses with all the
amendments to be referred to an editorial committee consisting of Comrades
Lenin, Zinoviev, Andreyev and Bukharin for final endorsement and
publication in the name of the Central Committee with mention that the
theses aresupported by the Bureau of the Party group at the A.C.C.T.U. (Central Party
Archives, Institute of Marxism-Leninism).

Thefinal text of the theses was published on January 17, 1922, inPravdaas a decision of the Central Committee, R.C.P.,
representing the C.C.’s draft theses on the question of the trade unions
for the Eleventh Congress of the Party. The congress adopted the C.C.’s
theses as a basis; during their discussion in the committee several
amendments were introduced (seeThe C.P.S. U. in the Resolutions and
Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Plenary Meetings of the Central
Committee, Part I, 1954, pp. 603-12).

Volume33 of this edition gives the final text of the Central
Committee’s decision on “The Role and Functions of the Trade Unions Under
the New Economic Policy”. The present volume gives Lenin’s draft of the
theses.

[4]Pravdafor January 3, 1922, published a news-item reporting
the “Suicide of Engineer Oldenborger” which stated: “The Moscow Soviet,
in agreement with the Moscow Committee of the R.C.P., appointed a special
commission to investigate the causes of the suicide of V. V. Oldenborger,
Chief Engineer of the Moscow Municipal Waterworks. The Commission found
that the deceased was not only a highly skilled employee, but a man utterly
devoted to his work. The cause of suicide were the difficult conditions,
which interfered with the daily routine of Oldenborger’s work. Some of the
members of the Waterworks Special Trio, instead of trying to improve things
at Moscow’s Waterworks, made them more difficult and complicated than ever;
Engineer Semyonov, Chief Inspector of the People’s Commissariat for
Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection, who is a member of this Trio, was rude,
cavilling and bureaucratic in his relations with Oldenborger;
Makarov-Zemlyansky, Chief Inspector of the same commissariat and a former
clerk at the Waterworks, carried on a ceaseless persecution of Oldenborger;
and Yelagin and Merkulov, workers of the Alexeyevsk Pump-House, accused
Oldenborger groundlessly of technical disorganisation of the Waterworks and
of an attitude of disrespect towards the communist group on the part of the
employees. All this was bound to have its effect on the emotional state of
the deceased. The commission considers the continued employment of
Makarov-Zemlyansky impermissible not only in the Workers’ and Peasants’
Inspection, but in Soviet service generally, as being a person who is alien
to the spirit of Soviet service, an intrigant who has earned among the
employees of the Waterworks the reputation of being a dishonest man. The
commission also found that engineer Semyonov of the W.P.I. should not be
allowed to continue work at the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection or to
have anything to do with the Moscow Municipal Waterworks, and likewise
considers it necessary that Yelagin and Merkulov should be dismissed from
the Waterworks and transferred to some other enterprise."

Seealso pp. 386-87 of this volume.

[3]Lenin’sproposal that a commission be set up to check and replace some
of the leading personnel in the trade unions was based on the fact that the
trade unions were honeycombed with former Mensheviks and
Socialist-Revolutionaries and that it was necessary to fix a longer record
of Communist Party membership for leading trade union officials in keeping
with the resolution of the Eleventh All-Russia Conference of the
R.C.P. “On the Question of Strengthening the Party as a Result of the
Verification of Its Membership” (see “The C.P.S.U. in the Resolutions
and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Plenary Meetings of the
Central Committee”, Part I, 1954, p. 596).

Lenin’smotion was adopted by the Politbureau. On January 20, 1922, a
commission was set up consisting of M. P. Tomsky, A. A. Andreyev and
S. I. Syrtsov. The commission reported its findings to the Eleventh
Congress of the R.C.P.(B.) (seeThe Eleventh Congress of the R.C.P.(B.)
Verbatim Report., 1961,  pp. 246–52).